Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

A review of the rationales for corporate risk management: fashion or the need?

Contents:

Author Info

  • Danijela Miloš

    ()
    (Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Zagreb)

  • Metka Tekavčič
  • Željko Šević
Registered author(s):

    Abstract

    This paper presents the extensive literature survey based both on theoretical rationales for hedging as well as the empirical evidence that support the implications of the theory regarding the arguments for the corporate risk management relevance and its influence on the company’s value. The survey of literature presented in this paper has revealed that there are two chief classes of rationales for corporate decision to hedge - maximisation of shareholder value or maximisation of managers’ private utility. If corporate hedging decisions are capable of increasing firm values, they can do so by reducing the volatility of cash flows. The literature survey presented in this paper has revealed that, by hedging financial risks firms can decrease cash flow volatility, what leads to a lower variance of firm value. This means that not only a firm value is moving less, but that the probability of occurring low values is smaller than without hedging. Reduced volatility of cash flows results in decreased costs of financial distress and expected taxes, thereby enhancing the present value of expected future cash flows. Additionally, it reduces the costs associated with information “asymmetries” by signalling management's view of the company's prospects to investors, or it reduces agency problems. In addition, reducing cash flow volatility can improve the probability of having sufficient internal funds for planned investments eliminating the need either to cut profitable projects or bear the transaction costs of obtaining external funding. However, it needs to be emphasised that there is no consensus as to what hedging rationale is the most important in explaining risk management as a corporate policy. It can be concluded that, the total benefit of hedging is the combination of all these motives and, if the costs of using corporate risk management instruments are less than the benefits provided via the avenues mentioned in this paper, or any other benefit perceived by the market, then risk management is a shareholder-value enhancing activity.

    Download Info

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
    File URL: http://web.efzg.hr/repec/pdf/Clanak%2007-14.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2007
    Download Restriction: no

    Bibliographic Info

    Paper provided by Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Zagreb in its series EFZG Working Papers Series with number 0714.

    as in new window
    Length: 17
    Date of creation: 11 Jul 2007
    Date of revision:
    Handle: RePEc:zag:wpaper:0714

    Contact details of provider:
    Postal: Trg J.F.Kennedya 6, 10000 Zagreb
    Phone: +385 1 233-5633
    Fax: +385 1 238-3333
    Email:
    Web page: http://www.efzg.hr
    More information through EDIRC

    Related research

    Keywords: corporate risks; rationales of risk management;

    Find related papers by JEL classification:

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    References

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    Citations

    Lists

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zag:wpaper:0714. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (WPS).

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.